Hello Box:

That is a hugely impressive megaliner ....

A virtual tour (such as the one featured in the link) would seem to represent a potentially most elegant solution to this problem. [The word "compromise" would seem somewhat harsh and inappropriate to use under these circumstances]. After all, I am indeed looking for any possible innovative options that could provide us with some much-needed functional "eye candy" to enhance our (presently somewhat graphic insipid) application ....

Nevertheless, I still need someone to voluntarily assist us in compiling such a virtual tour - indeed possibly a somewhat more complex virtual tour than the one featured in the link ....

Btw: What software was used to create that lovely (and highly functional) image?

Box:

My second attempt was somewhat more successful (I saw the lady with the red jersey). There was still a massive amount of lag ....

@unknownuser said:

I'm sorry you were unable to view the file on your computer, perhaps it is one of those lightweight ones designed for the masses.

I am afraid that is all that I can afford as an unemployed caregiver ....

No disrespect was intended with my earlier comment. It just seems to represent a factual observation ....

Hello Box:

I have long given up (with SketchUp at least) the possibility of any form of internal walk-through. All I would desire is an external THC model. In fact, the series of internal divisions appearing in my outlines (which are ultimately not essential) are merely an attempt at "correcting" the measurements of the individual wings.

@unknownuser said:

Jeremy, you seem to be missing the main point here, a white knight isn't what you need, the extent of your project exceeds the capabilities of sketchup.

I was hoping that such a "White Knight" would have access to and be proficient with one of the standard professional CAD products. Sadly (and with all due respect) Google SketchUp seems to be a "light weight" freeware product specifically designed for the (admittedly) creative masses. It certainly does not seem to possess the capabilities of its (admittedly hugely expensive) equivalent commercial products specifically designed for the professional market.

They are sadly (but in truth) obviously "chalk" and "cheese" ....

@unknownuser said:

Open it up and have a look how it behaves when you try to navigate around it.

The programme immediately became unresponsive and froze ....

Point taken ....

Hello all:

I have tried the Autodesk forums - but with no success ....

This is as far as things have gone in a long time. However (if it is deemed impossible to replicate an admittedly far more complex version of Sandy's original model) I am prepared to "call it quits" with this seemingly overambitious aspect of our healthcare education application ....

If there is a "White Knight" lurking in the background, I humbly suggest that s/he "comes to the party" now ....

Extra comment:

I was previously informed by a professional architect that many of his colleagues use SketchUp to refine their designs. They then subsequently import the finished SketchUp design into a CAD programme in order to render it. I don't know whether this insight is of any relevance to us ....

Charly:

You seem to have included four of the five wings in your models. Therefore not too much is missing. However I do easily appreciate the fact that (as further possible details are inserted into the developing model) its size will most likely continue to soar.

Does SketchUp have a predefined limitation in the amount of information (for want of a better term) that it can store?

Admittedly, Sandy's earlier (and much simpler) model was developed with 3ds Max 2008 ....

Therefore "quo vadis"?

Hello Karl, et al.:

Please forgive me - but it has taken me ages to see where your above interpretation of my proposed THC model further departs from the original concept ....

The inner decagonal rings are totally missing and have been replaced by a small innermost square. Admittedly this solution obviates the possibility of additional deadspace existing between decagonal arrangements of the modules. Maybe we can still attempt this rather tricky aspect of the design which will determine the alignment of the FIVE (and not four) outer double wings .... ??

Now perhaps you are beginning to see the inherent difficulty in this design ....

Hello Charly:

You are certainly getting a bit closer ....

Unfortunately a 2d outline (of only one wing) does not easily translate into a fully-fledged 3d model of the entire complex (which consists of five identical wings and the central rings). For instance, the series of (presently flat) square shaped areas situated between the sets of modules are actually internal quadrangles (open spaces) that need to be enclosed within each floor. The internal passageways will also need "cut across" the internal water features (as a series of perspex-lined structures).

Maybe you can try these (fairly minor) modifications and we might (hopefully) slowly move forward ....

Hi there:

Unless something truly meaningful transpires, this will most probably represent the final post of this thread.

I have taken the liberty of attaching a (reduced size to meet the requirements of this forum) schematic outline of one of the five identical "double wings" (where each labeled rectangular block is a 110m x 22m module).

I would like to forward my kindest regards and sincerest gratitude to those people who have contributed to this thread.

![A more accurate "double wing" outline](/uploads/imported_attachments/Lhej_TwincruciformTHwingMegaTHC2.png "A more accurate "double wing" outline")

The above outline placed within Google SketchUp

A slightly more complex (at the base) outline placed within Google SketchUp

Hello Box:

I am really impressed with your obviously fairly hastily designed model of my proposed main THC design. While not perfect in the positioning of the individual modules, it certainly does provide one with a good idea of what it could like at a slightly different scale.

I see that it has already had (iirc) 27 downloads. Is there anyone "lurking" in this thread who would like to try to "run" with this?

Otherwise I suppose that this might (quite possibly) represent a somewhat appropriate final post for this lengthy and ultimately vainglorious thread ....